PC didn't like the exact proposal. Will comment in bug, and await reply.

Good, brief discussion on this topic in general, for next year. May want to be more creative and consider multilevel categories, wizards that could help narrow interests (and "include source" checkbox choice), should also better represent _the_ packages that are available from EPP (e.g. "RCP Developer").

PC Position on off-cycle releases and use of discovery site (and EPP)? This came up in discussions about a Pulsar package.

Conclusion: we do not want to support off-cycle releases. But with following compromise: If a project still met all the normal "release criteria" set forth as must-do's by PC then they could introduce something new during SR1 or SR2 (that is SR1 and SR2 can have more than service, if important, and must-do criteria met). The reason for not supporting things off cycle was a. it is more work to support it, b. there is no opportunity for "simultaneous release" testing, c. it would dilute the meaning of "simultaneous release".